不同血浆浓度瑞芬太尼复合异氟烷麻醉的药效学随机对照研究

目的观察瑞芬太尼、异氟烷不同配伍方式静吸复合全麻在腹腔镜手术中应用的药效学。方法选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级择期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术或腹腔镜卵巢囊肿切除术45例随机分为3组，每组15例。3组诱导方式均相同。麻醉维持，A组维持吸人异氟烷1．3肺泡气最低有效浓度值（minimum alveolar concentration，MAC）；B组维持吸入异氟烷0．6MAC复合瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度4ng／L靶控输注；C组维持吸入异氟烷0．4MAC复合瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度6ng／L靶控输注。药效学观察指标；脑电双频指数（bispeetral index，BIS）、心率变异性（heartratevariability，HRV）、平均动脉压（mean arterial pressure，MAP）、心率（heartrate，HR）及追加肌松剂时间、呼吸恢复时间、睁眼时间、气管导管拔管时间、定向力恢复时间、术后“术中知晓”随访。同时记录各组维持期吸人异氟烷的肺泡MAC。药效学观察指标进行组问比较。结果①A组BIS值气腹2min和胆囊或卵巢肿物切下时均较B、C组低，但HRV数值在气腹2min和胆囊或卵巢肿物切下时均较B、C组高；A组MAP、HR在气腹2min时高于C组，但拔管后和清醒时又较C组低。②吸入异氟烷0.6MAC伍用瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度4ng／L，及吸入异氟烷0．4MAC伍用瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度6ng／L在腹腔镜手术巾即可维持一定麻醉深度。③在拔管时间、睁眼时间、定向力恢复时间上，B、C组均较A组有明显缩短。结论吸入异氟烷0．6MAC伍用瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度4ng／L，及吸入异氟烷0．4MAC伍用瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度6ng／L麻醉应用于腹腔镜手术，既可保证术中不同刺激的麻醉深度，又可使患者术毕快速高质量清醒。瑞芬太尼4ng／L复合异氟烷0．6MAC临床应用较瑞芬太尼6ng／L复合异氟烷0．4MAC更为理想。     

不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对鼻内镜手术患者鼻黏膜微循环的影响

目的 比较不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对MAP和鼻黏膜微循环的影响.方法 择期行全麻下鼻内镜手术患者45例,ASA1或Ⅱ级,随机分为R1、R1和R3组,每组15例,三组术中靶控输注瑞芬太尼4、6、8 ng/ml,调整丙泊酚血浆靶浓度维持脑电双频指数(BIS)45～55,术中间断静脉注射维库溴铵维持肌松.持续动态监测记录鼻黏膜微循环血流(NBF)变化,同步监测MAP并评定术野质量.结果 与靶控输注前基础值比较,靶控输注瑞芬太尼15 min三组患者的NBF均减少(P＜0.05),与R1组比较,R2、R3组的NBF均明显减少(P＜0.01),R2组和R3组的NBF差异无统计学意义;与靶控输注前基础值比较,靶控输注瑞芬太尼各时点三组MAP均下降(P＜0.05),组间差异无统计学意义.三组NBF减少与MAP降低均不存在明显的相关性.与R1组比较,R2组R3组的术野质量提高,手术时间缩短,出血量明显减少(P＜0.05).结论 靶控浓度6 ng/ml瑞芬太尼和丙泊酚麻醉用于鼻内镜手术能明显减少NBF,提供理想的术野且不会显著降低血压.     

瑞芬太尼复合麻醉患者术后急性阿片类药物耐受的发生

目的 评价瑞芬太尼复合麻醉患者术后急性阿片类药物耐受的发生情况。方法 60例择期手术患者随机分为3组（n=20），吸入麻醉组吸入1．3 MAC异氟醚和氧化亚氮维持麻醉;静脉麻醉组靶控输注（TCI）异丙酚（血浆靶浓度3μg／ml）、瑞芬太尼（血浆靶浓度4 ng／ml）维持麻醉;复合麻醉组吸入0．8 MAC异氟醚和氧化亚氮及TCI瑞芬太尼（血浆靶浓度2 ng／ml）维持麻醉。观察术后早期恢复阶段（30 min）患者的疼痛评分及吗啡用量。结果 静脉麻醉组和复合麻醉组在术后早期恢复阶段的疼痛评分及吗啡用量均高于吸入麻醉组（P〈0．05），但2组间比较差异无统计学意义（P〉 0．05）。结论 患者瑞芬太尼复合TCI异丙酚或复合吸入异氟醚麻醉均可导致急性阿片类药物耐受的发生。     

靶控输注依托咪酯复合瑞芬太尼用于支气管超声引导内镜针吸活检术的效果

目的 评价靶控输注依托咪酯复合瑞芬太尼用于支气管超声引导内镜针吸活检术的效果.方法 择期拟行支气管超声引导内镜针吸活检术患者69例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,性别不限,年龄35～71岁,体重41～ 83 kg,采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为3组(n=23),Ⅰ组麻醉诱导采用靶控输注异丙酚,血浆靶浓度3～4μg/ml,静脉注射芬太尼4μg/ml;Ⅱ组麻醉诱导采用靶控输注异丙酚,血浆靶浓度3～4μg/ml,靶控输注瑞芬太尼,血浆靶浓度5 ng/ml;Ⅲ组麻醉诱导采用靶控输注依托咪酯,血浆靶浓度0.3 ～ 0.4 μg/ml,靶控输注瑞芬太尼,血浆靶浓度5ng/ml.待患者意识消失后置入喉罩,行机械通气,维持PETCO2 30 ～40 mm Hg.术中维持BIS值40～60.记录术中血管活性药物(佩尔地平、麻黄碱、阿托品和艾司洛尔)使用情况、呛咳发生情况、苏醒时间、术后24h恶心呕吐发生情况.于麻醉诱导前30 min、术毕即刻和术后24h,采集股静脉血样,采用放射免疫法测定血浆皮质醇浓度.结果 与Ⅰ组比较,Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组呛咳和恶心呕吐的发生率降低,苏醒时间缩短,Ⅲ组血管活性药使用率降低(P＜0.05);与Ⅱ组比较,Ⅲ组血管活性药物使用率降低(P＜0.05).与Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组比较,Ⅲ组术毕时血浆皮质醇浓度降低(P＜0.05);Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组间各时点血浆皮质醇浓度差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 靶控输注依托咪酯(血浆靶浓度0.3～0.4 μg/ml)复合瑞芬太尼(血浆靶浓度5ng/ml)用于支气管超声引导内镜针吸活检术的麻醉效果好,不良反应少.     

应用响应曲面研究丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼在腹腔镜胆囊切除术麻醉中最佳配伍剂量

目的应用响应曲面分析法,观察丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼在镇静作用上的药效学相互作用规律,探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)靶控输注丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼的最佳配伍剂量。方法选择2014~2016年北京大学第三医院择期LC 100例,5例因手术方式改变、1例因术中出现过敏性休克退出研究,94例完成临床观察和随访。选择丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼靶控输注起始配伍浓度,观察靶控输注至警醒/镇静(Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation,OAA/S)评分≤1分的意识消失时间(time to loss of consciousenss,T LOC),术中根据脑电双频谱指数(bispectral index,BIS)、有创动脉血压和心率(heart rate,HR)调整丙泊酚和瑞芬太尼的靶控输注浓度,维持BIS 40~60、平均动脉压≥60 mm Hg、HR≥50次/min且平均动脉压和HR波动不超过基础值30%。记录停止输注瑞芬太尼与丙泊酚至OAA/S评分≥3分的意识恢复时间(time to recovery of consciousness,T ROC)。以受试者T LOC≤5 min、T ROC≤10 min、术中95%患者药效指标满意为目标,计算丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼在LC术中靶控浓度的最佳配伍范围。结果丙泊酚(2~9μg/ml)与瑞芬太尼(1~10 ng/ml)在T LOC和T ROC的药效上呈协同作用。LC药物靶控浓度的最佳配伍范围:丙泊酚2μg/ml(推荐监测BIS)伍用瑞芬太尼6~10 ng/ml,丙泊酚3μg/ml伍用瑞芬太尼3~5 ng/ml,丙泊酚4μg/ml伍用瑞芬太尼3 ng/ml,丙泊酚4.5μg/ml伍用瑞芬太尼2.6 ng/ml。丙泊酚浓度≥5μg/ml复合小剂量瑞芬太尼,45例中43例BIS<40;靶控输注丙泊酚2μg/ml复合瑞芬太尼6~10 ng/ml,给予气管插管刺激时,25例中2例BIS值呈一过性上升,术中BIS均维持在40~60。3例(3.2%)意识消失前出现呼吸暂停;7例(7.4%)麻醉诱导期间出现循环抑制,其中4例使用血管活性药物;21例(22.3%)主诉注射痛;7例(7.4%)出现多语和不自主活动。术后随访无知晓发生。结论丙泊酚(2~9μg/ml)与瑞芬太尼(1~10 ng/ml)在镇静药效反应呈协同作用;不同的药效反应相结合创建出的丙泊酚与瑞芬太尼最佳配伍剂量范围,可以为LC提供满意的麻醉,并且麻醉诱导和麻醉恢复快速。     

不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对患者异丙酚镇静效应的影响

目的 探讨不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对患者异丙酚镇静效应的影响.方法 择期拟行腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者80例,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄18～60岁,随机分为4组,每组20例.麻醉诱导:Ⅱ～Ⅳ组靶控输注瑞芬太尼,血浆靶浓度分别设为2、4、8 ng/ml,Ⅰ～Ⅳ组均靶控输注异丙酚,初始血浆靶浓度为2μg/ml,随后每间隔1min增加0.5μg/ml,直至BIS值下降至50.患者意识消失时记录BIS值和异丙酚血浆靶浓度,BIS值降至50时记录异丙酚血浆靶浓度及异丙酚总用量.结果 与Ⅰ组比较,Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组患者意识消失时BIS值升高,异丙酚血浆靶浓度降低,BIS值降至50时异丙酚总用量和异丙酚血浆靶浓度降低(P＜0.05).结论 复合异丙酚麻醉时,瑞芬太尼适宜血浆靶浓度为4 ng/ml.     

异丙酚、地氟醚或七氟醚复合瑞芬太尼麻醉对脑功能区手术患者术中唤醒试验的影响

目的 探讨异丙酚、地氟醚或七氟醚复合瑞芬太尼麻醉对脑功能区手术患者术中唤醒试验的影响.方法 择期拟行脑功能区肿瘤切除术患者60例,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄18～60岁,随机分为3组:异丙酚组(P组)、地氟醚组(D组)及七氟醚组(S组),每组20例.静脉注射依托咪酯0.3mg/kg、芬太尼3 μg/kg、维库溴铵0.1 mg/kg行麻醉诱导,采用1%丁卡因喉头及气管粘膜表面麻醉后行气管插管.P组、D组和S组分别靶控输注异丙酚,血浆靶浓度2.0μg/ml,持续吸入地氟醚、七氟醚1.5 MAC维持麻醉.各组均靶控输注瑞芬太尼,血浆靶浓度2.5 ng/ml,唤醒试验前血浆靶浓度降为0.5 ng/ml,静脉注射曲马多100mg,停用麻醉药,行唤醒试验.记录唤醒时间,观察唤醒试验时躁动及寒颤的发生情况.结果 各组患者唤醒时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),P组寒颤发生率较D组和S组高(P<0.05).结论 采用异丙酚、地氟醚或七氟醚复合瑞芬太尼麻醉,脑功能区手术患者术中唤醒时间无差别,地氟醚或七氟醚复合瑞芬太尼麻醉时有关并发症发生率低,更适用于术中唤醒试验.     

不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对患儿吸入七氟烷诱导气管插管最低肺泡有效浓度的影响

目的 评价不同血浆靶浓度瑞芬太尼对患儿吸入七氟烷诱导气管插管最低肺泡有效浓度(MAC)的影响.方法 择期全麻患儿126例,年龄3～8岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为4组,对照组(C组,n=30);R1组(n=30)、R2组(n=30)和R3组(n=36)瑞芬太尼血浆靶浓度分别为1、2、3 ng/ml.均吸入5%七氟烷行麻醉诱导,睫毛反射消失后鼻腔置入导管连接气体分析仪,建立静脉通路,注射阿托品0.01 mg/kg,R1-3 组靶控输注瑞芬太尼.C组注射阿托品、R1-3组瑞芬太尼血浆浓度与效应室浓度达平衡后,采用改良序贯法进行试验,初始呼气末七氟烷浓度均为3.0%,相邻浓度比值为1.2,七氟烷呼气末浓度达到预定值并维持10 min后行气管插管.气管插管条件满意的标准:气管插管条件评分为6分.计算每组七氟烷MAC,并观察不良反应的发生情况.结果 C组、R1-3组患儿吸入七氟烷诱导气管插管的MAC分别为5%、3%、2%、1%,依次降低(P<0.01);所有患儿均无心动过缓、低血压等发生,R2组3例、R3组8例患儿因下颌松弛度差致喉镜无法置人或声门关闭,静脉注射罗库溴铵完成气管插管.结论 瑞芬太尼1 ng/ml可降低患儿吸入七氟烷诱导气管插管的最低肺泡有效浓度,且不良反应少.     

瑞芬太尼复合麻醉病人术后急性阿片类药物耐受发生的再评价

目的 再评价瑞芬太尼复合麻醉病人术后急性阿片类药物耐受的发生情况.方法 择期全麻下行脊柱外科手术病人90例,年龄18～64岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机分为3组(n=30),吸入麻醉组(S组)吸入七氟烷麻醉诱导,吸入七氟烷及氧化亚氮维持麻醉;舒芬太尼组(SP组)靶控输注舒芬太尼和异丙酚诱导和维持麻醉,瑞芬太尼组(RP组)靶控输注瑞芬太尼和异丙酚诱导和维持麻醉.病人在麻醉恢复室停留1 h,然后送返病房,在麻醉恢复室采用静脉注射吗啡镇痛,在病房采用病人自控静脉镇痛,镇痛泵内含0.5 mg,ml吗啡,共100 ml.记录术后10 min、20 min、30 min、40 min、50 min、60 min、2 h、12 h、24 h、36 h和48 h时视觉模拟评分(VAS)和吗啡用量.结果 与SP组和S组比较,术后1 h内RP组VAS评分和吗啡用量增加(P＜0.05或0.01),术后2～48 h VAS评分和吗啡用量差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 瑞芬太尼复合麻醉病人术后1 h内存在急性阿片类药物耐受现象.     

丙泊酚血浆靶控输注与不同镇痛药物用于人工流产术的麻醉效果

目的比较丙泊酚血浆靶控输注分别复合芬太尼或舒芬太尼单次静脉注射及雷米芬太尼血浆靶控输注用于人工流产术的效果。方法选择120例行人工流产术的患者,随机分为芬太尼单次静脉注射组(F组)、雷米芬太尼血浆靶控输注组(R组,靶浓度为4ng/ml)和舒芬太尼单次静脉注射组(S组),分别复合丙泊酚血浆靶控输注(靶浓度为4μg/ml)行静脉全麻,观察起效时间、恢复时间、准确定向时间、术中体动(程度和次数)、镇痛效果、呼吸抑制、HR、MAP、SpO2变化及术后并发症等。结果R组麻醉起效时间显著低于F组和S组(P<0·01),麻醉恢复时间显著高于F组和S组(P<0·01),R组的丙泊酚总用量、吸宫时术中最低SpO2、术中体动及术后恶心呕吐、嗜睡均低于F组和S组(P<0·05,P<0·01),R组的呼吸抑制显著高于F组和S组(P<0·01)。结论丙泊酚血浆靶控输注复合雷米芬太尼血浆靶控输注的麻醉方法用于人工流产术,其镇痛效果优于丙泊酚血浆靶控输注复合芬太尼或舒芬太尼单次静脉注射的麻醉方法,但要注意雷米芬太尼呼吸抑制作用较强的特点。     

腹腔镜联合手术

腹腔镜联合手术是其切口创伤小、灵活机动、便于多病联治优越性的突出体现。作者自１９９１年以来实施的１０００余例腹腔镜外科手术中有５２例为联合手术。其中胆囊与阑尾联合切除２４例；胆囊切除加非寄生虫性肝囊肿开窗引流２例；胆囊切除联合腹股沟斜疝内环夹闭３例；联合脐疝修补１例；胆囊切除加胆总管切开取石、Ｔ管引流１２例；胆囊与右侧卵巢囊肿、左侧附件联合切除１例；胆囊与子宫肌瘤联合切除１例；胆囊与右肾错构瘤联合切除１例；右腹股沟斜疝修补加左精索曲张静脉高位扎闭２例；食管裂孔疝修补加胃底折叠术３例。５２例腹腔镜联合手术中除２例中转开腹外，其余的５０例均获得成功。作者认为：只要严格掌握联合手术指征，腹腔镜联合手术能够安全、有效地联合处理两种或两种以上的腹部病变，使此类患者充分享受微创外科手术的优越性，并相对地节省医疗费用，具有一定的社会经济效益。     

Surgical approach to right colon cancer:From open technique to robot.State of art

This work is a topic highlight on the surgical treatment of the right colon pathologies,focusing on the literature state of art and comparing the open surgery to the different laparoscopic and robotic procedures.Different laparoscopic procedures have been described for the treatment of right colon tumors: Totally laparoscopic right colectomy,laparoscopic assisted right colectomy,laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy,hand-assisted right colectomy,single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,robotic right colectomy.Two main characteristics of these techniques are the different type of anastomosis: Intracorporeal(for totally laparoscopic right colectomy,single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,laparoscopic assisted right colectomy and robotic technique) or extracorporeal(for laparoscopic assisted right colectomy,laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy,hand-assisted right colectomy and open right colectomy) and the different incision(suprapubic,median or transverse on the right side of abdomen).The different laparoscopic techniques meet the same oncological criteria of radicalism as the open surgery for the right colon.The totally laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis and even more the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy,remain a technical challenge due to the complexity of procedures(especially for the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy) and the particular right colon vascular anatomy but they seem to have some theoretical advantages compared to the other laparoscopic and open procedures.Data reported in literature while confirming the advantages of laparoscopic approach,do not allow to solve controversies about which is the best laparoscopic technique(Intracorporeal vs Extracorporeal Anastomosis) to treat the right colon cancer.However,the laparoscopic techniques with intracorporeal anastomosis for the right colon seem to show some theoretical advantages(functional,technical,oncological and cosmetic advantages) even if all studies conclude that further prospective randomized trials are necessary.Robotic technique may be useful to overcome the problems related to inexperience in laparoscopy in some surgical centers.     

腹腔镜与开腹胃十二指肠溃疡穿孔修补术的对比研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜胃十二指肠溃疡穿孔修补术的可行性及安全性.方法:回顾分析2008年1月至2010年5月收治的30例腹腔镜和38例开腹胃十二指肠溃疡穿孔修补患者的临床资料.结果:腹腔镜组与开腹组平均手术时间分别为(58.64±10.6)min和(76.42±15.4)min(P＜0.05);术中出血量分别为(35.84±...     

腹腔镜下多发性子宫肌瘤切除术的手术体会

目的:探讨腹腔镜多发性子宫肌瘤切除术术中止血及残存肌瘤的处理方法。方法:66例患者中30例行开腹子宫肌瘤切除术,36例行腹腔镜手术。肌瘤最多12个,最少2个。腹腔镜组中18例行单纯腹腔镜子宫肌瘤切除术,18例行腹腔镜子宫肌瘤切除术加子宫动脉阻断术。腹腔镜子宫肌瘤切除术中结合B超监测。结果:开腹手术后平均住院(7.21±0.85)d,术后排气时间(31.15±7.26)h,腹腔镜术后平均住院(4.72±0.81)d,术后排气时间(21.13±5.36)h。单纯腹腔镜手术:平均手术时间(98±24)min,术中出血(129.7±58.6)ml,术后复发率26.3%。腹腔镜联合子宫动脉阻断术:平均手术时间(105.6±27.6)min,术中平均出血(87.52±18.35)ml,术后复发3.1%。结论:患者行腹腔镜多发性子宫肌瘤切除术后康复快。由于腹腔镜手术的进展,选择病例的范围更广泛,联合子宫动脉阻断术比单纯腹腔镜手术电切、分离、缝扎等安全可靠,且出血少,复发率低,术中B超监测降低了肌瘤切除术的漏切率。     

Complications of 2,775 urological laparoscopic procedures: 1993 to 2005

PURPOSE: We assessed the complications associated with urological laparoscopic surgery at a single high volume center during a 12-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart analysis was performed, focusing on complications associated with 2,775 laparoscopic surgeries occurring between 1993 and 2005. These included radical nephrectomy (549), partial nephrectomy (345), donor nephrectomy (553), simple nephrectomy (186), pyeloplasty (301), nephroureterectomy (105), retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (86), renal ablation (81), adrenalectomy (106) and radical prostatectomy (463). Complication data were tabulated according to case number, procedure type, patient age, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, conversion status, length of hospitalization, Clavien classification system and annual complication rate during the study. Statistical analysis was performed with Fisher's exact and chi-square tests. RESULTS: A total of 614 complications (22.1%) occurred within each group, broken down into laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (20%), laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (28%), laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (28%), laparoscopic simple nephrectomy (15%), laparoscopic pyeloplasty (13.3%), laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (40.9%), laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (26.7%), laparoscopic renal tumor ablation (18.6%), laparoscopic adrenalectomy (25.4%) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (15%). Total intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were 4.7% and 17.5%, respectively. Vascular injuries were the most common intraoperative complications. Annual complication rates plateaued in the year 2000 and were not significantly different during the ensuing 4 years (p >0.05). Complications correlated with a greater American Society of Anesthesiologists score as well as a longer hospital stay (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The data presented here help define the complication rates for laparoscopic urological procedures in experienced hands at a high volume institution.     

Outcomes of laparoscopic and open colectomy at academic centers

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic techniques have emerged as a suitable approach for colon resection. This study determined and compared the outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic or open colectomy at United States academic centers. METHODS: Using ICD-9-CM codes, we obtained data from the University HealthSystem Consortium database for 50,443 patients who underwent open (n = 47,090; 94%) or laparoscopic (n = 3,353; 6%) colectomy during a 5-year period (2002 to 2006). Outcomes studied included length of stay (LOS), costs, in-hospital morbidity and risk-adjusted mortality rates. RESULTS: Mean LOS (open = 11 days and laparoscopic = 7 days) was significantly shorter and mean costs (open = $23,000 and laparoscopic = $17,000) significantly fewer with the laparoscopic approach. The overall in-hospital morbidity rate was significantly lower with laparoscopic colectomy (open = 33% and laparoscopic = 24%). The risk-adjusted mortality ratio was comparable between groups (open = .9 and laparoscopic = .7). Comments: Despite the major biases inherent in this retrospective review of the University Health System Consortium, which favors the use of laparoscopic colectomy by United States academic surgeons, laparoscopic colectomy offers the potential of significantly shorter LOS, fewer costs, lower in-hospital morbidity rates, and comparable risk-adjusted mortality rates compared with open colectomy. Laparoscopic colectomy is as safe as the open approach.     

Laparoscopic subtotal colectomy for acute or severe colitis complicating inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched study in 88 patients

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the morbidity of laparoscopic subtotal colectomy (STC) with or without anastomosis in patients with acute or severe colitis (SAC) complicating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who failed medical treatment. METHODS: Forty patients undergoing laparoscopic STC for SAC complicating IBD were identified and well-matched for age, gender, ASA score, and IBD severity at the time of colectomy (acute colitis vs steroid dependence only) with 48 patients undergoing open STC. RESULTS: There was no operative mortality. Mean (+/-SD) operative time was similar after laparoscopic and open STC (253 +/- 56 vs 231 +/- 75 min; NS). Two patients (5%) required conversion into laparotomy due to intensive adhesions (n = 1) and colonic fistula (n = 1). Overall morbidity and hospital stay was similar after laparoscopic STC and open STC (35% vs 56%) (9 +/- 3 vs 12 +/- 7 days) (P > .1) respectfully. After laparoscopic STC, 84% of the patients underwent restorative intestinal continuity (with either ileorectal or ileoanal anastomosis) through reoperative laparoscopy (n = 15) or elective incision at the site of previous stoma (n = 16). CONCLUSIONS: This case-matched study suggests that laparoscopic STC was as safe and effective as open STC for IBD patients with SAC. A laparoscopic STC allows restoration of intestinal continuity restoration (ie, ileal pouch anal or ileorectal anastomosis) through a laparoscopic approach or elective incision for the majority of the patients. For these reasons, laparoscopic approach represents the best approach for colitis-complicating IBD.     

自制腹腔镜胆道取石钳在腹腔镜治疗胆总管结石中的应用研究(附64例报告)

目的:探讨自行设计的腹腔镜胆道取石钳在腹腔镜治疗胆总管结石中的取石效果及应用价值。方法:64例患者在腹腔镜下切开胆总管,先用胆道镜探查,取石网篮取石失败后,用胆道取石钳在胆总管内碎石并取出结石,同时可交替使用取石网篮取石。结果:22例胆总管中有<1.0 cm的游离结石,用腹腔镜胆道取石钳直接取出;31例胆总管中有≥1.0 cm的游离结石,由腹腔镜胆道取石钳联合取石网篮顺利在胆总管内碎石和取石;16例胆总管中有嵌顿的难取性结石,用腹腔镜胆道取石钳在胆总管内碎石后单独或联合取石网篮取出结石。3例术后胆总管残余小结石,经胆道镜取净残余结石。无一例因无法取出结石而中转开腹。结论:腹腔镜胆道取石钳用于腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术,缩短了取石时间,降低了取石难度,避免了因难取性结石而中转开腹手术。在腹腔镜治疗胆总管结石术中有实用性。     

胆囊结石合并胆总管结石两种微创治疗术式的应用体会

目的探讨微创技术在治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的手术方式的选择。方法回顾性分析2004年1月至2009年12月采用腹腔镜胆囊切除联合内镜下Oddi括约肌切开取石术(lapa-roscopic cholecystectomy combined with endoscopic sphincterectomy,LC+EST)和腹腔镜胆囊切除、胆总管探查术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration,LC+LCBDE)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的资料。结果 LC+EST应用在2004-2006年与2007-2009年各3年度治疗效果对比:手术并发症、手术成功且无手术并发症例数差异均有统计学意义(P0.05),而中转开腹例数差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。LC+LCBDE应用在2004-2006年与2007-2009年各3年度治疗效果对比:手术并发症、手术成功且无手术并发症及中转开腹例数差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。LC+EST和LC+LCBDE在治疗效果上对比:手术并发症、手术成功且无手术并发症及中转开腹例数差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论胆石病的微创治疗方式与术者熟练程度有关。LC+EST、LC+LCBDE有着不同的适应证范围:LC+EST术式宜用于结石小于1.5cm,发生部位为肝胆管以下平面,并且胰腺段胆总管结石病人选择LC+EST术式更为合理;LC+LCBDE术式适宜于胆总管扩张超过1.5cm的较大结石。     

腹腔镜技术在泌尿系和胆囊疾病中的联合应用

目的：探讨腹腔镜技术在泌尿系和胆囊疾病中联合应用的可行性及应用前景。方法：回顾性分析2001年10月～2004年6月间施行的腹腔镜联合手术28例,分别为腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合肾脏切除术4例,联合肾囊肿去顶减压术22例,联合肾上腺切除术2例。结果：1例右侧肾上腺结核病者因与下腔静脉粘连严重改行开放手术,其余联合手术均获成功。手术时间50～150min,平均110min;术中出血10～50ml,平均20ml;术后12～36h肛门排气,无并发症。术后住院4～6天,平均4,7天。结论：只要严格掌握联合手术指征,腹腔镜联合手术就能够安全、有效地同时处理泌尿系及胆囊共存疾病,具有良好的应用前景。